The Ninth Circuit upheld the ruling of an appeals court yesterday in a 2-1 decision, though mainly by simply deferring to the lower court's judgement. The opinions of the majority and the dissenter are a bit long to read, bit they found that the appeals court correctly judged that magazines were most likely protected by the Second Amendment.
An excerpt from the majority reads as follows:
"The district court did not abuse its discretion by concluding that magazines for a weapon likely fall within the scope of the Second Amendment. First, the district court identified the applicable law, citing[, among other cases,] Jackson v. City & County of San Francisco (9th Cir. 2014). Second, it did not exceed its permissible discretion by concluding, based on those cases, that (1) some part of the Second Amendment right likely includes the right to bear a weapon "that has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia"; and (2) the ammunition for a weapon is similar to the magazine for a weapon, Jackson,746 F.3d at 967 ("'[T]he right to possess firearms for protection implies a corresponding right' to obtain the bullets necessary to use them." (quoting Ezell v. City of Chicago (7th Cir. 2011)))...."